A clever solution, nice work. That said, I'm very curious about your long term view on this model as a differentiator. My understanding is that Wise fees are essentially a pass through to customers, so your differentiator is that you've chosen "slow and cheap" over "fast but costly"... but if you validate that there's a market for "slow and cheap" alongside "fast but costly" won't Wise (and others) introduce the "slow and cheap" option because you'll threaten their place in the market as you also offer "fast but costly"? The profitability of Wise is not predicated on "fast but costly".

I am not a fan of "...but what if you're copied..." argument against the viability of a business, because often the easy-to-copy outward expression of a business is only possible because of difficult-to-copy underlying business strategies. However, in this case, Wise do share the same underlying business strategies as Atlantic (that is, transact efficiently and take a small fee) so the only differentiator (as far as I know) is the product decision to offer cheap + slow (and therefore be able to transact even more efficiently).

There's lots of room for different players in the space and so "there's room for us alongside Wise" is a very valid answer, I am guessing there's a different answer though, so I'd love to understand what you imagine the future to be: maybe you have some insight into why, actually, there are operational complexities that mean Wise aren't going to ever offer this service in the same way.

Thanks!